the state department, the pentagon and the cia and the question who is responsible for what happened that night in libya for preventing and failing to prevent what happened. and the report is that general petraeus wanted to get out there aggressively in defense of the cia and ultimately did by release that time line and the intel officials were not too happy with petraeus and the suggestion is suddenly when they became unhappy about what he started to do on libya to defend the cia, suddenly his affair was a deal breaker. suddenly that went up to the upper etch lons and clapper told him he needed to resign and petraeus wanted to keep his job but did what his boss told him to do which was resign. does that make sense to you? is that feasible? >> you are not the on person saying it. megyn: i'm not saying it at all. the "wall street journal" is saying it. >> charles krauthammer made a similar statement. maybe the thing that was being held as the sword of damocles was the preknowledge of this. i don't know. that's all speculation. here is the point i was trying to make before the break. t